Enhancing the Impact of Implementation Strategies in Healthcare: A Research Agenda

Efforts to identify, develop, refine, and test strategies to disseminate and implement evidence-based treatments have been prioritized in order to improve the quality of health and mental health care delivery. However, this task is complicated by an implementation science literature characterized by inconsistent language use and inadequate descriptions of implementation strategies. This article brings more depth and clarity to implementation research and practice by presenting a consolidated compilation of discrete implementation strategies, based on a review of 205 sources published between 1995 and 2011. The resulting compilation includes 68 implementation strategies and definitions, which are grouped according to six key implementation processes: planning, educating, financing, restructuring, managing quality, and attending to the policy context. This consolidated compilation can serve as a reference to stakeholders who wish to implement clinical innovations in health and mental health care and can facilitate the development of multifaceted, multilevel implementation plans that are tailored to local contexts.

Background Determinants of practice are factors that might prevent or enable improvements. Several checklists, frameworks, taxonomies, and classifications of determinants of healthcare professional practice have been published. In this paper, we describe the development of a comprehensive, integrated checklist of determinants of practice (the TICD checklist). Methods We performed a systematic review of frameworks of determinants of practice followed by a consensus process. We searched electronic databases and screened the reference lists of key background documents. Two authors independently assessed titles and abstracts, and potentially relevant full text articles. We compiled a list of attributes that a checklist should have: comprehensiveness, relevance, applicability, simplicity, logic, clarity, usability, suitability, and usefulness. We assessed included articles using these criteria and collected information about the theory, model, or logic underlying how the factors (determinants) were selected, described, and grouped, the strengths and weaknesses of the checklist, and the determinants and the domains in each checklist. We drafted a preliminary checklist based on an aggregated list of determinants from the included checklists, and finalized the checklist by a consensus process among implementation researchers. Results We screened 5,778 titles and abstracts and retrieved 87 potentially relevant papers in full text. Several of these papers had references to papers that we also retrieved in full text. We also checked potentially relevant papers we had on file that were not retrieved by the searches. We included 12 checklists. None of these were completely comprehensive when compared to the aggregated list of determinants and domains. We developed a checklist with 57 potential determinants of practice grouped in seven domains: guideline factors, individual health professional factors, patient factors, professional interactions, incentives and resources, capacity for organisational change, and social, political, and legal factors. We also developed five worksheets to facilitate the use of the checklist. Conclusions Based on a systematic review and a consensus process we developed a checklist that aims to be comprehensive and to build on the strengths of each of the 12 included checklists. The checklist is accompanied with five worksheets to facilitate its use in implementation research and quality improvement projects.

To determine the effectiveness of different types of interventions in improving health professional performance and health outcomes. MEDLINE, SCISEARCH, CINAHL and the Research and Development Resource Base in CME were searched for trials of educational interventions in the health care professions published between 1970 and 1993 inclusive. Studies were selected if they provided objective measurements of health professional performance or health outcomes and employed random or quasi-random allocation methods in their study designs to assign individual subjects or groups. Interventions included such activities as conferences, outreach visits, the use of local opinion leaders, audit and feedback, and reminder systems. Details extracted from the studies included the study design; the unit of allocation (e.g., patient, provider, practice, hospital); the characteristics of the targeted health care professionals, educational interventions and patients (when appropriate); and the main outcome measure. The inclusion criteria were met by 102 trials. Areas of behaviour change included general patient management, preventive services, prescribing practices, treatment of specific conditions such as hypertension or diabetes, and diagnostic service or hospital utilization. Dissemination-only strategies, such as conferences or the mailing of unsolicited materials, demonstrated little or no changes in health professional behaviour or health outcome when used alone. More complex interventions, such as the use of outreach visits or local opinion leaders, ranged from ineffective to highly effective but were most often moderately effective (resulting in reductions of 20% to 50% in the incidence of inappropriate performance). There are no "magic bullets" for improving the quality of health care, but there are a wide range of interventions available that, if used appropriately, could lead to important improvements in professional practice and patient outcomes.